Stakeholder activism, managerial entrenchment and the congruence of interests between shareholders and stakeholders
We argue that when stakeholder protection is left to the voluntary initiative of managers, concessions to social activists and pressure groups can turn into a self-entrenchment strategy for incumbent CEOs. Stakeholders other than shareholders thus benefit from corporate governance rules putting managers under a tough replacement threat. We show that a minimal amount of formal stakeholder protection, or the introduction of explicit covenants protecting stakeholder rights in the firm charter, may deprive CEOs of the alliance with powerful social activists, thus increasing managerial turnover and shareholder value. These results rationalize a recent trend whereby well-known social activists like Friends of the Earth and active shareholders like CalPERS are showing a growing support for each other’s agendas.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 1989. "Management entrenchment : The case of manager-specific investments," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 123-139, November.
- DeAngelo, Harry & DeAngelo, Linda, 1998. "Ancient redwoods and the politics of finance: the hostile takeover of the Pacific Lumber Company," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 3-53, January.
- Aghion, Philippe & Tirole, Jean, 1997. "Formal and Real Authority in Organizations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(1), pages 1-29, February.
- Rosett, Joshua G., 1990. "Do union wealth concessions explain takeover premiums? : The evidence on contract wages," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 263-282, September.
- Marco Pagano & Paolo F. Volpin, 2005.
"The Political Economy of Corporate Governance,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1005-1030, September.
- Marco Pagano & Paolo Volpin, 1999. "The Political Economy of Corporate Governance," CSEF Working Papers 29, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy, revised 01 Jul 2005.
- Pagano, Marco & Volpin, Paolo, 2001. "The Political Economy of Corporate Governance," CEPR Discussion Papers 2682, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Marco Pagano & Paolo Volpin, 2001. "The Political Economy of Finance," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 502-519.
- Marco Pagano & Paolo Volpin, 2001. "The Political Economy of Finance," CSEF Working Papers 76, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
- Pagano, Marco & Volpin, Paolo, 2002. "The Political Economy of Finance," CEPR Discussion Papers 3231, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1988. "Value Maximization and the Acquisition Process," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 7-20, Winter.
- Ambec, Stefan & Barla, Philippe, 2002. "A theoretical foundation of the Porter hypothesis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 355-360, May.
- Baron, David P., 2001. "Private Politics," Research Papers 1689, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
- Brian E. Becker, 1995. "Union Rents as a Source of Takeover Gains among Target Shareholders," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 49(1), pages 3-19, October. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)